posted on August 23, 2000 08:14:10 PM
Yep I know Survivor is on!
I wrote up on EO about my neg, cuz the guy couldn't get thru to my email. That was his negative, that he tried 3 x and that item was broken....
Well I went obsessive on it... and wrote him from 3 different ISPs and FINALLY I went and ack- joined juno to get thru to him, and it did.....
This IS THE SECOND NEGATIVE I've gotten with apologies all over the damn place.... he said he'd try to 'fix it' (the negative) and then wanted to KNOW IF I WAS MARRIED AND DID THE XXOO sh*t!!!!! ????? Thats exactly what the previous guy who negged me did!!!!! YUCK!!!!!!
So anyway I think I will pass on ebay for awhile..... I know you got to take the negs, but I just can't seem to, esp. when they are BS ones.....
Ok I'm done, and I'm betting the old guy Rudy wins..... or maybe the truckdriver gal....this is only the second time I've watched this show too
posted on August 23, 2000 08:58:00 PM
Right...sure...uh-huh.
Well, according to your TOS:
You clearly state in your ad that you do your best to describe your items and that "ALL SALES ARE FINAL." You further state that if the buyer has any doubts the buyer should email you questions BEFORE bidding.
Therefore, in accordance with your TOS the buyer's attempt to email you was for naught and the negative given you is improper. You did say, "Ask before you bid" and "All sales are final."
Granted, I doubt the buyer would have considered asking you if there were loose parts being the ad indicates the extreme opposite.
However, you did say in your ad, and eBay's TOS supports you, (paraphrased) If you have any questions, better ask before you bid….all sales are final.
Hell, if I were you, I would remind the buyer of the stated terms, I would hold the buyer to the stated terms, I would advise the buyer he or she must accept the item, and blast the buyer in your response to the negative fb he/she gave you. After all, fair is fair. ROTFLMAO
posted on August 23, 2000 09:10:12 PM
Um sgtmike Why do you constantly edit your posts?
YES I PUT ALL SALES FINAL, but that is never the case, I have given refunds before, of course, IF I PUT money back guarenteed within such and such a time..... I *may* be getting more buyers remorse, and I always thought of this as an auction, but with you bringing the FTC bs in, people who get all wierd on you, when you FINALLY reach them, I am having second thoughts about this whole thing. Ever been to a real life auction, they never give refunds, but with you, if you started citing all the regs and such, maybe they would, you'd scare me! (not)
YES I GIVE REFUNDS, but I don't advertise it.... OK?
Go count the stitches in your quilt or something.....you really do not like me, that I can see.
posted on August 23, 2000 09:25:31 PM
Online auctions are not "real-life" auctions. That argument was laid to rest many moons ago, starting on the DNF board.
AND, at real-life auctions you can physically examine the goods before bidding, and ask questions and receive an immediate response.
posted on August 23, 2000 09:46:13 PM
Sorry Mike, but that's not true, or maybe it's true when you go to some farm implement forclosure out in your area.
At real auctions, you get a preview period, always too brief, in which you can walk through amongst hordes of other bidders and SEE (sorta) the lots to be auctioned, but you aren't allowed to handle them and it's no use trying to ask any questions of the security gaurd type idiots in attendence.
Had you ever been to what you call a real auction you'd know that you are very much at risk, playing a guessing game, right then, on the spot, and ALL sales are final with payment upfront and a short period of time to remove all articles purchased. You'd be unlikely ever to succeed at that game because you've got to be sharp, knowledgeable, and fast on your feet. At some it depend simply on how quickly you can bring down your card so that a higher bid than you intend is not placed.
Online auctions ARE auctions, the longest possible auctions in which bidders are afforded plenty of time to ask questions, request additional views and information, and compare like products also at auction at the same time.
I do not know state auction laws in your state, or what terms are forced upon the bidders, but in my region what you just said would be an alien (extraterrestrial) language.
There is ample time to inspect the goods and the auctioneers will usually tell you what item or lot is up next. All bidders can handle the items as much as they need to, to properly evaluate the condition.
Additionally, considering that one may not have had ample time to fully inspect an item or lot, if there is significant difference in what the auctioneer claims, or a flaw or design not appropriate with age and or described condition, the item can be refused, I know, I have done so on occasions.
Also, I do not ask a security guard or handler, I ask the person who is obligated to provide the answer if the answer is known, the state licensed auctioneers conducting the auction.
The age-old belief that an appearance of a bid that was not intentionally signaled is binding is a fallaciously. That just is not true. That is an intimidation ploy and illegal…at least here it is.
posted on August 23, 2000 10:48:42 PM
As I said, maybe out on the farm, but you are attempting to lay out the conditions in auction for all everywhere based in some misguided or provincial authority and you don't know what you're talking about.
Ebay, and like kind, are, in the senses and terminology that you use actually what you say they are not.
Head out to the big city and go to any auction you find. You will then realize that you are a hick or hayseed: a babe in the woods, as it were, in the world of real life auctioning.
Go somewhere where the items to be auctioned number in the tens or hundreds of individual pieces within each lot, all piled together in rolling stock to be trotted out pellmell at auction time. You will have bought a catalog, a nearly useless pile of many sheets of paper with descriptions that read like "one lot of musical instruments-assorted, or "one lot of 1000 mixed sewn products" (that's where your quilt might be; right in the middle and not visable). You had your one hour preview with everyone else and now you're all seated in an auditorium, bid card in hand. If your card is up and noone else's is it's "Sold!! To the gentleman in the green suit" and it's final.
Notice while you're trying to cope that the licensed auctioneer is nowhere to be found, and does not appear until stage time with a PA mike and a short hello before the onslaught of auctionese.
No, Mike, you've NEVER been to a REAL auction if you don't know these things, and it's got nothing to do with what state the auction occurs.
posted on August 23, 2000 11:09:42 PM
I would assume with confidence that most states have binding statutes governing auctioneers, auctions, and resale goods. If there is any violation occurring, to recognize a violation is occurring or has occurred, and not be a victim, it is dependent upon the person having common sense to suspect that a certain act may be illegal and having the backbone to stand up for themselves.
In auctions of the size and performance as you described, does not preclude law. If the item(s) cannot be inspected and one must go by a catalogue, the item must be as represented in catalogue. In certain large auctions, certain federal codes kick in.
Even in GOA and DOD auction/sales I have been involved in, where multi-thousand to mutli-million dollar items and lots have been processed, misrepresentation or omission is illegal, and can be grounds to refuse the bid.
Excerpts from California auction statutes
-Must truthfully represent the goods to be auctioned.
-Unlawful to place or use any misleading or untruthful advertising or statements or make any substantial misrepresentation
-Unlawful to misrepresent the terms, conditions, restrictions, or procedures under which goods will be sold at auction.
-Unlawful to knowingly misrepresent the nature of any item or items to be sold at auction, including, but not limited to, age, authenticity, value, condition, or origin. A violation of this subdivision is an infraction subject to a fine of two hundred fifty dollars ($250); in addition, it shall be required that the buyer of the misrepresented item be refunded the purchase price of the item or items within 24 hours of return to the auctioneer or auction company of the item by the buyer, provided that the item is returned within five days after the date of the auction sale.
-Unlawful to misrepresent or prevent reasonable inspection prior to item or items being auctioned.
The moral of the story is, never attempt to bull #*!@ the bull when the bull is the one who knows what is in the pasture and where it lays.
posted on August 23, 2000 11:10:44 PM
sgtmike takes a wicked blow to the head, followed by some quick jabs...krs has him down on the canvas! Is the referee going to stop this, no, sgtmike is struggling to his feet...
I'm sorry this happened to you. I have had an awfully hard time getting emails through to AOL users lately. They don't even bounce back to me, just go into cyberspace. The guy should have had more patience and not have gotten so nasty with you.
I'm like you. I give refunds, too, but don't advertise the fact. Sounds to me like you are a good seller so don't let them get you down!!!!!!!!!
The Franz Metronome (I am sure YOU know what that is, of course ) was in perfect working condition, before I packed it. I have 2 pianos in this house, ok one keyboard, and one actual piano, and myself, and my other piano player (my kid)
used it, until we got another. Both the light and the sound kept beat perfectly.
As for my TOS here it is
We do the best to describe the items. All sales are final, so if you have questions at all, please feel free to email me with any queries before bidding, if you have any doubts. Thanks for looking and bidding!
Buyer to pay $3.20 for USPS Priority shipping
I don't control the internet, nor its email, he had filters on the juno mail... how was I to know, and ya know, I went out of my way, if I do say so myself, to track him down to give him a refund, and I did, and EVEN BEFORE getting the metronome back. I paypaled him the money with shipping both ways.
And got one more question for ya
Did you say you are/were involved in multi million $ auctions...... I ask ya......
if so what the heck ya doin on eBay... shoot ... ya should be at Sothebys shouldn't ya? Heck, we had a small operation farm awhile back... went to livestock auctions all the time.... got some pretty sorry critters, but the dang auction house said
All Sales Final gotta know yer livestock, ya know? Some of them there chickens were tough, but ya git what ya paid fer.
I always heard: When ya wrestle with a,
um, pork? you get all dirty and smelly and the, um, pork likes it..
posted on August 24, 2000 12:00:37 AM
Mike, are you daft? You spout all of this nonsense and cannot see that the carefully drawn references that you rely on actually support what they purport to prevent.
Every one of the restrictions that you've mentioned in CA law, or in any law, encourage the briefest and least specific prior description and inspection of articles to be auctioned.
To use my example of "one lot of musical instruments--assorted" can't you see how difficult it would be to define that as misrepresentative if in fact there was a pile of musical instruments presented. Can't you see that the only inspection needed to satisfy the requirement in law is that a cursory glance be allowed so the prospective bidder could see that it was musical instruments and not handsaws that were contained in the lot? There is nothing in those references which allows minute inspection, nor is anything contained there which offers any degree of representation allowed to be not termed misrepresentation.
It's really no wonder that the knowledgeable people here ignore you; you don't have any substance in your too many words. For my part, I only respond to you because of past battles, but the only advise I can give you is to stick to what you know, if you know anything, or be still.
I'm glad I'm not the only one. I have seen
auctions that give a 7-10-30 day guarentee on the items... and say that right out there, which to me, IMO, says: ok I'll wear that dress to the prom, then take it back to the store tommorow kinda thing...
Yes, like you, I will give refunds, but will
not advertise that fact.
yep I've had problems with AOL too, but I kept AOL for my kids, so I can always get on there and email them there... this guy, though had filters on, thats what made his emails to me bounce.... and how was I to know that, until that neg.... yuck!
posted on August 24, 2000 12:06:48 AM
All sales final, absent of misrepresentation or omission of certain relevant or important information e.g., known serious heath condition, is valid if prior notice given.
You did not get my point. Your TOS was binding, or so you have said. Hold the buyer to it, or so you say.
I am trying.
"I always heard: When ya wrestle with a, um, pork? you get all dirty and smelly and the, um, pork likes it.."
I'm sorry, that flew over my head. Is it meant to be a philosophic warning or a selection of wisdom derived from experience?
posted on August 24, 2000 12:08:26 AM
krs-stick to what he knows best? I think...... I think he is an editor in real life! well.... he does do it a lot, editing I mean....
sgtmike, I hope you know what I say is all in jest, at least the part about you being an editor
"To use my example of "one lot of musical instruments--assorted" can't you see how difficult it would be to define that as misrepresentative if in fact there was a pile of musical instruments presented. Can't you see that the only inspection needed to satisfy the requirement in law is that a cursory glance be allowed so the prospective bidder could see that it was musical instruments and not handsaws that were contained in the lot? There is nothing in those references which allows minute inspection, nor is anything contained there which offers any degree of representation allowed to be not termed misrepresentation."
Totally incorrect and examples given are intermingled with several having opposing elements.
Additionally, you have went too far down the wrong road in an attempt to outdistance and evade me so you can stop for soda along a dusty road in the boonies and tell some illiterate and uneducated proprietor of a rundown gas station how you smoked me and that you are the "dude."
Except, the road is a dead-end, you gotta come back, and I am sitting at the intersection with the right road map.
In other words, babble is for brooks. The gibberish may smoke some, but not all, and never me.
posted on August 24, 2000 01:05:09 AM
I do believe the main subject of argument has fell by the wayside.
However, to reiterate why krs' example is not valid; a sale is technically a conditional transaction that is legally binding if the applied and stipulated conditions are valid and met.
If time and reasonableness permits an inspection of goods, to do so cannot be disallowed. If the circumstances prevent a purchaser from being able to properly inspect an item, then the consumer must rely upon a written or spoken description and other respective aspects e.g., value, history, etc.
If an auctioneer was to put a box of miscellaneous items up for bid, or a single item, and advised the audience that he or she knows nothing about the item(s) and cannot guarantee the condition that implies the item(s) is/are being sold is and it (is) buyer beware.
However, if the item(s) are described to be in a condition they are not, a value they are not, or not having a claimed history, and the seller knows otherwise, or does not know but is simply claiming it, that is "Misrepresentation."
If a seller knows that there are hidden defects, or in the case of mouthed musical instruments that the previous owner died of AIDS, that is an "Omission" of known information vital to the purchaser.
Misrepresentation and omission can breach a contract (sale).
posted on August 24, 2000 01:24:30 AM
Wrong again, Mikey.
If someone says that a thing is in good overall condition, what information do you have? Consider a car; A car in good overall condition may have windows which do not go up and down, or it may have a leaking transmission. That car might even have the interior torn to shreds and yet still be within the decription as required for sale at auction under any law that you care to conjure up.
For the word 'good' is a statement of judgement, however competently made. On a given car, any number of flaws may be acceptable to meet the codition description without misrepresentation or violation of any regulatory act.
If you were to come across a 1932 Duesenberg roadster, for example, in dilapitated and inoperable condition, that car would probably rate a 'very good' description.
But be that as it may be, note in your own references that the only things disallowed in law are deliberate misrepresentations. No such deliberate act can occur in a case of a description of "one big pile of musical instruments" if, in fact, you have before you one big pile of musical instruments. By the description they don't have to be complete, or undamaged, or even playable at all. All that they must be is what they are described to be, and you've already admitted that they are.
Try a little experiment. Take one of the bottles which your psychotropics come in and describe what you have. Now leave out a portion of your no doubt lengthy description. Then leave out another portion. Keep doing that while you stay still within the law as you understand it. Sooner or later you should note that it takes a very minimal description to satisfy the requirement of law.
While you struggle with that, Shelly and I have more fun things to do. We'll see you in the morning.
If this debate keeps up, you'll soon elevate your examples to the sale of nuclear arms.
The "original" discussion pertained to what is proper and what is binding regarding online auction sales. It is my contention, and my practice, that I am not always obligated to ask the seller for information to confirm that the seller is not engaging in actual or constructive fraud, misrepresentation, had made a mistake of fact, or intentionally omitting information that misrepresents any or all aspects of an item.
However, regarding your latest example that exceeds the original argument.
A vehicle is usually open to thorough inspection, even to the level of having a qualified mechanic inspect the vehicle if time permits. If the owner or agency refuses, that is a very good reason to back off.
If a person describes something as "good" that (is) a personal opinion and remains that if deception or fraud is not an element. If you describe something as "good" but I am being provided the necessary information or means to (also) evaluate, and I do not agree with your "good," no harm, no foul. If you purposely withhold or claim something you know may cause me injury (not physical), that is quite different.
-Fraud is either actual or constructive. Mistake may be either of fact or law but does not provide an absolute defense.
-An unconscious ignorance or forgetfulness of a fact past or present, material to the contract; or, 2. Belief in the present existence of a thing material to the contract, which does not exist, or in the past existence of such a thing, which has not existed …does not discharge a claim of injury as a result of mistaken information provided by the erring party of
-It is unlawful to knowingly misrepresent the nature of any item or items to be sold at auction, including, but not limited to, age, authenticity, value, condition, or origin.
-Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who purchases a vehicle that is sold through a dealer at an auction of vehicles open to the general public shall have the same rights and remedies against the dealer who conducts the auction sale as if that dealer were the owner and seller of the auctioned vehicle.
" It takes a very minimal description to satisfy the requirement of law." is never a given and does prohibit litigation. Satisfying a requirement does not exclude the right for a consumer to seek damages for other causes emanating from the satisfied agreement.
The court decides if the requirement was satisfied and without fraud or mistake that (did or did not) cause the consumer injury
posted on August 24, 2000 11:06:46 AM
Wrong again Mikey. Are you going for score?
The ORIGINAL discussion had to do with Shelly's feelings about an auctioning experience that she had, most recently.
You brought this little project to this thread, probably to harrass her, and it carries from your earlier locked and equally inane thread.
So kheicat had knocked your silliness aside and you perceived a new victim in Shelly. I'm taking that off of her and other than that I couldn't care less about what you say because I know full well, and you know that I do, from personal experience, just exactly how little you know about what you spend so much time supposedly 'educating others' about.
posted on August 24, 2000 12:45:14 PM
Typical political tactics; regardless of known facts, say or claim it, a certain percentage of the population will always be gullible and believe it or corrupt and support it.
It was you that took this thread elsewhere and changed and elevated the examples to a point a Mixmaster would be envious.
I originally posted a reply to her opening comments because what she said, although it may extremely difficult for some to detect, because it is a complete contradiction of the arguments she present on my thread.
"So kheicat had knocked your silliness aside..? Must be another one of your hallucinations. I seldom get knocked aside, most of all and definitely not by "kheicat." Although facetiousness abounds in many threads, "kheicat" had never been able to present an intelligent argument regarding any of my subjects/comments.
As for your comment "I know full well, and you know that I do, from personal experience, just exactly how little you know about what you spend so much time supposedly 'educating others' about., such statement is a common tactic you use in an attempt too debase an argument and the person presenting the argument, when you are loosing ground.
No, I do not know that you know that I know that you know, from personal experience, just how little I might know regarding particular subject. How do I know this? Because we have never (had) a personal experience of any degree that would provide you any information to know what you have just claimed. Another reason I know that your statement is a false claim is because I do know. The only part of your statement that has a degree of truth it the word "I." From that point on it all went downhill.
Of course, such tactics do work on the naive and those who require a leader.
If you do desire to obtain some factual credibility, prove what I have presented is factually incorrect. Show us the law or the court rulings that totally contradict my assertions and statements. All other tactics are worthless.
posted on August 24, 2000 12:52:10 PM
Actually... I was just a ventin a bit...
sgtmike Oh, your an educator, besides and editor, I always thought you were some kind of Sargent (duh me huh? )
And the purpose? of this thread was just that, ventin I guess, I thought this was the RT and it really didn't have to pertain to auction related stuff... I was doin a wee bit o' ventin and contemplating retirin from this eBay...
And ya know Sarge, if you re read the post,
it was about the how the guy 'acted' more than anything, nothing to do with the auction. And your the one that replied to it, and must be checking out my old auctions, as you say, 'according to your TOS' blah.....
Just got back from the drs... new meds, ya know, needed them, after reading you...
posted on August 24, 2000 01:20:44 PM
Well, Mikey, it only takes a look at my feedback to show that I know of your knowledge and practices at auctioning, or had you forgotten about that? I have to presume that you've also forgotten about ALL of your pleaful entreaties for assistance and advise both in public on an ebay board and in private in email to myself and to other users. What? You were hoping that I would post your ebay ID? Ha! Talk about losing tactics!
And no, Shelly did NOT bring any portion of "your" subject to this thread. She vented about an experience, as I've already mentioned, and you came along first in line to point to her TOS as supposedly proving your premises. This thread is not a continuation of that thread. You did, after all, request that that one be locked when you didn't like what was said.
I know that you drink quite heavily in the middle of the night, but don't you think that you could do yourself the favor of reviewing your posts in the cold morning light so as not to continue to make such a fool of yourself.
As to your derrogatory remarks about the intelligent posts of kiheicat; I disagree entirely. I think you could do well to learn from her, or from anyone, for the matter.
It is your call, Shelly, to ask for this to be locked. I think that you should do that.
posted on August 24, 2000 01:28:59 PM
aw.... hmmmmm, should it be locked or not..... I know the sarge wants it locked..... hmmmmmm..... lemme think.... LOL!!!!!!!
